search for: ptracer

Hi all, We have been thinking internally about a lightweight llvm-based ptracer. To address one question up front: the primary way in which this differs from LLDB is that it targets a more narrow use case -- there is no scripting support, no clang integration, no dynamic extensibility, no support for running jitted code in the target, and no user interface. We have several us...

...at's what you meant, but wanted to be sure. > > Jim > > > On Jun 26, 2018, at 11:58 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev < > lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > We have been thinking internally about a lightweight llvm-based > ptracer. To address one question up front: the primary way in which this > differs from LLDB is that it targets a more narrow use case -- there is no > scripting support, no clang integration, no dynamic extensibility, no > support for running jitted code in the target, and no user interface. We...

...ant, but wanted to be sure. >> >> Jim >> >>> On Jun 26, 2018, at 11:58 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> We have been thinking internally about a lightweight llvm-based ptracer. To address one question up front: the primary way in which this differs from LLDB is that it targets a more narrow use case -- there is no scripting support, no clang integration, no dynamic extensibility, no support for running jitted code in the target, and no user interface. We have several u...

...28 PM Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 26, 2018, at 11:58 AM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > We have been thinking internally about a lightweight llvm-based > ptracer. To address one question up front: the primary way in which this > differs from LLDB is that it targets a more narrow use case -- there is no > scripting support, no clang integration, no dynamic extensibility, no > support for running jitted code in the target, and no user interface. We...